2015-10-07_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 2, 2015 Page 8 Public Comment 351 Written comments were provided by Paul Romanowski, 2195 Acorn Road in the form of 352 an e-mail dated September 2, 2015 with an attached letter dated November 15, 1993 353 from Mr. Mueller to City Manager Steve Sarkozy; and also written comments were 354 provided by S & V Ramalingam, 2182 Acorn Road, both provided as bench handouts, 355 andattached hereto and made a part hereof. 356 Irv Cross, 2196 Marion Road 357 Having been a resident in this neighborhood and abutting Mr. Mueller’s property for 358 sixteen years, Mr. Cross summarized his concerns provided in written comments, 359 included in the staff report (Attachment D).Mr. Cross disputed the comments made by 360 City Engineer Culver opining that a river forms from drainage, and had continually killed 361 the grass in that area.Mr. Cross opined that he didn’t see any changeunless the water is 362 redirected or not allowed to flow through there again, given the size of the proposed lots. 363 Mr. Cross referenced Attachment B providing an aerial view of the property, noting the 364 density of trees and vegetation, making it a pleasant enjoyable community and their 365 reason to move to that location in Roseville, since it provided a country feel with the 366 vegetation and lot sizes within an urban community.However, once the trees are 367 removed, never to be seen again, Mr. Cross opined that it would dramatically change the 368 character of the area, including drainage becoming more problematic given the proposed 369 elevation for lower lots. 370 While getting along fine with Mr. Mueller as his neighbor, Mr. Cross expressed his 371 puzzlement in the proposed land fill or raising property levels that will not help with 372 drainage for adjacent properties.Mr. Cross asked that the Commission take this into 373 consideration, noting the reason for originally buying his property with the wildlife, 374 vegetation and space, even though still emotionally tied to their neighbors. 375 Mr. S.Ramalingam, 2182 Acorn Road 376 Mr. Ramalingam summarized his written comments as noted and concerns for negative 377 impacts of this proposed development related to grading, drainage, tree preservation, 378 additional impervious area, and detracting from the ambience and character of an 379 established, tree-filled neighborhood. 380 Mr. Ramalingam asked that the City consider that allneighbors are against destroying 381 this single=-family neighborhood with the proposed subdivision. 382 Gary Boryczka,former owner of 2250Acorn Road, still owner of an adjacent lot 383 As the owner of property on Acorn Road immediately south of the service road onthe 384 corner, Mr. Boryczka also noted that he was a homeowner on Acorn Road until selling his 385 home approximately one year ago.Mr. Boryczka stated that this project or different 386 variations of it had been constantly proposed by Mr. Mueller for over ten yearsno without 387 any notable changes in its design.Mr. Boryczka opined that the proposed subdivision 388 would destroy this unique neighborhood and its history in the community, which the City 389 had previously spent money on to make it a unique area of Roseville.Mr. Boryczka 390 opined that the proposed road showing 9’parking stalls was deceiving as it would not 391 allow enough room for snow storage in the winter time.Mr. Boryczka advised that he was 392 in the construction businesses, but was having a hard time visualizing how emergency 393 vehicles would access this subdivision during a typical Minnesota winter. 394 Regarding the grading plan and tree preservation plan, Mr. Boryczka questioned how the 395 Oak tree drip lines would suffice, opining most of those trees would die.Further, Mr. 396 Boryczka addressed the swale drainage proposed to flow to the southwest corner of the 397 property, which had never changed in the many variations proposed for this subdivision, 398 opining that it will drain off onto someone else’s property as the proposed ponds will 399 absolutely not hold the stormwater runoff.Given his expertise in the field of stormwater 400 drainage, Mr. Boryczka further opined that the runoff would not stay in those areas due to 401 their depth. 402